Replies

Doesn’t change the question’s premise.

No, it does not. However it does shed light on your lack of knowledge on the matter.

A Canadian company, TransCanada won. It is already moving gas to the lower 48.

This is way off. No gas line has been built yet, and no gas is being exported off slope. Plans for open season are only now being submitted to FERC for development of a pipeline, which is a long ways off from development, if it even happens. If it does go through all stages to completion, it will be the largest engineering project in American history. Exxon is only drilling exploration wells, and is still trying to find possible ways to export gas to *local* markets. Again, no gas has left yet.

A little tid-bit, TransCanada and Exxon are partners in their bid for a pipeline. How's that for irony regarding some of the posts here?? (snicker)

I don't mean to be too abrasive, but where do you get some of your information?

And the answer is?

The answer, as I've stated on this thread, is that many applications to drill that lease have been filed to the state. The state denied them.

a percent of the take—which, in turn, would be distributed to Alaskans

Socialism 101..... Production companies buy the mineral rights to a lease, as they do in any other state when it is public property. Nowhere in Article 8 - Natural resources, of the AK state constitution does it spell out anything resembling a state-run business on behalf of 'the people'.

Furthermore, if what you are saying is true, why are mines not treated (taxed) the same?